136
Votes

Feature Request - Guest Network separate DHCP/DNS settings

 
136
Votes

Feature Request - Guest Network separate DHCP/DNS settings

194 Reply
Re:Feature Request - Guest Network separate DHCP/DNS settings
2022-02-09 10:27:28 - last edited 2022-03-15 08:06:06

@TP-Link 

TP-Link wrote

@TravisPerkins GeorgeBark elaygl 1101011 WendelF

Thank you very much for all your feedback.

Could you please do me a favor and go to Deco APP/Tether APP>Help>Contact US>Suggestions and send a feedback to the product team?

It would be highly appreciated if you could add some background of why you need this feature.

It seemed like a monthly basis request spreadsheet did not make this feature go any further and maybe a direct feedback from users helps more.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Best regards.

 

 

Hi @TP-Link 

Sad to see we still need to submit suggestions through the app when there's already a whole discussion going on here. But thanks for trying to get this request to the product team.

Anyway, I have sent a suggestion through the Deco app, and added the link to this thread. I suggest the other followers in this thread do the same.

 

As others have said already, setting the secondary DNS to 8.8.8.8 might look like a quick solution, but this just cripples the pihole setup for the main network: it won't be used all the time. Also, when you manuall add DNS records to the pihole's local DNS, these won't work when your device is using the secondary DNS for some reason.

 

I hope we have shown enough reasons why separate DNS settings for the guest network is really needed.

#44
Options
[Recommended Solution]Feature Request - Guest Network separate DHCP/DNS settings
2022-02-10 01:06:30 - last edited 2022-03-15 08:06:06
I’ve got a pi hole - but I put all of my iot devices on my guest network for security reasons (because the guest network isolates devices) and because the iot devices use dhcp, I can’t manually change them.
#45
Options
Re:Feature Request - Guest Network separate DHCP/DNS settings
2022-03-16 16:32:04

@TP_LINK

 

I have the exact same use case here. Having a separate DNS setting for the guest network would be a huge boon. Currently, even with using the secondary DNS it makes the Guest Network unusable. Nothing resolves and on a lot of my devices it says there is no internet connection. It used to be fine on the M5 but now I have X55 and it does not work at all.

#46
Options
Re:Feature Request - Guest Network separate DHCP/DNS settings
2022-03-30 10:02:51 - last edited 2022-03-30 10:04:45

Hi  @TP-Link 

 

It's a bit sad to see this thread is already more than a year old, is still actively updated, but to date no real solution from tp-link itself.

Especially when the request was already taken into consideration:

 

TP-Link wrote

The separate DNS request is under consideration, but we need more support from other users to finally add it to the roadmap.

 

Is it possible to give an update on this? As multiple users have reported this to be an issue (with several use cases), I was hoping it would have already been added to the roadmap.

 

edit: I have also made a request with the Deco app itself as you asked, but I didn't get any reply.

#47
Options
Re:Feature Request - Guest Network separate DHCP/DNS settings
2022-03-31 01:35:00

  @BenVA thank you for your patience.

No, there hasn't been any update about this feature yet and I am afraid it is on a very lower priority.

best regards.

#48
Options
Re:Feature Request - Guest Network separate DHCP/DNS settings
2022-03-31 01:41:49
David, you and TP-Link should be ashamed of yourself. This forum is asking us to post feature requests. This is a very basic request that has been posted a year ago and the only response you gave us was that you needed more of us to request this feature through the Deco app itself. Many replied here that they want this feature. Now you respond that it's a very low priority. Seriously? The firmware hasn't been updated in a long time, so what is your actual priority at TP-Link? What is so much more important that this feature is one of the lowest priorities and probably never will get implemented? Can you explain a bit more? Because to me this feels like you're taking your customers as fools and just play around with us. It's absolutely disgusting and makes me doubt ever buying TP-Link again in the future.
#49
Options
Re:Feature Request - Guest Network separate DHCP/DNS settings
2022-03-31 07:49:33

I totally agree with @Rudy85.

 

This feature is essential to provide a good guest network experience.

If TP-link doenst listen to its clients, this really hurts your brand and makes me reconsider buying TP-Link in the future.

#50
Options
Re:Feature Request - Guest Network separate DHCP/DNS settings
2022-03-31 11:01:54

  @CanisLupusNL 

 

How much more support do you guys need exactly from the customers? Pages after pages people requested this basic feature and provided detailed justification. You should have already implemented this feature and we are being told it's not even in the roadmap? Are you serious? Your company's position clearly demonstrates how little care you have for your customer base!

 

I have waited enough. Returning the device back to Amazon in the basis of defective product. You cannot be in the networking business if you don't even acknowledge the importance of this basic feature. 

#51
Options
Re:Feature Request - Guest Network separate DHCP/DNS settings
2022-03-31 12:12:18

  @megesgir Why do you think it is a basic feature? I mean "separate DNS settings on guest network" since I see they already support customizing the DNS for the whole network.

I Google around and see Eero, Netgear and Google Wi-fi did not have it. Eero put it under consideration for 5 year and I still did not see it is coming anyway. maybe I missed something why it is so important? Since I did have any issue with the DNS settings, for me, I do hope they support changing channels or WPA3 for my Deco M9 plus.

 

#52
Options
Re:Feature Request - Guest Network separate DHCP/DNS settings
2022-03-31 12:54:47

Heidi_Alp wrote

  @megesgir maybe I missed something why it is so important?

 

This part has already been covered by the use cases presented in this thread.

#53
Options